To paraphrase Mean Girls, “stop trying to make hydrogen happen.”
For some years now, detractors of battery electric vehicles have held up hydrogen as a clean fuel panacea. That sometimes refers to hydrogen combustion engines, but more often, it’s hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles, or FCEVs. Both promise motoring with only water emitted from the vehicles’ exhausts. It’s just that hydrogen actually kinda sucks as a fuel, and automaker Stellantis announced today that it is ending the development of its light-, medium- and heavy-duty FCEVs, which were meant to go into production later this year.
Hydrogen’s main selling point is that it’s faster to fill a tank with the stuff than it is to recharge a lithium-ion battery. So it’s a seductive alternative that suggests a driver can keep all the convenience of their gasoline engine with none of the climate change-causing side effects.
But in reality, that’s pretty far from true.
Ideally there are no harmful combustion byproducts when used in ICE, the reality is probably less harmful combustion byproducts, not none Hydrogen is lossy, Conversions being inefficient, Molecules small enough to migrate from containment, Embrittlement of pipes & tanks
3 or more times the infrastructure per watt delivered, a huge investment in resources
I suppose if there is excess generating capacity, hydrogen could be used as a storage medium for night time
E.g. nitrogen oxides
We are talking about fuel cells, not ICE, though, right?
Yes, in principle we should be talking about fuel cells here.
Yet, this referrs to this statement in the text, mentioning both, ICE and fuel cells:
While this statement “no exhausts except water” holds for (low temperature) fuel cells, it doesn’t for ICEs.
Oh, I see now.